Thread: Re: [BUGS] "SET search_path" clause ignored during function creation

Erwin Brandstetter <brsaweda@gmail.com> wrote:

> Function bodies are checked using the _current_ search_path instead of
> the search_path supplied by the "SET search_path" clause.
>
> Proposed solution: Function bodies should be checked with the
> search_path provided by "SET search_path" an _not_ with the current
> search path at the time pof creation.

Thanks for the report!  Please check whether the attached patch
is the correct fix. An additional regression test is included.

Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center

Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> writes:
> Thanks for the report!  Please check whether the attached patch
> is the correct fix. An additional regression test is included.

That's going to provoke "uninitialized variable" compiler warnings,
but otherwise it seems reasonably sane.

I don't particularly see the point of the added regression test.
        regards, tom lane

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> writes:
> > Thanks for the report!  Please check whether the attached patch
> > is the correct fix. An additional regression test is included.
> 
> That's going to provoke "uninitialized variable" compiler warnings,
> but otherwise it seems reasonably sane.

I applied a revised version that can surpress compiler warnings
to 9.0beta, 8.4 and 8.3.

Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center